Whaling Ban

Introduction

The following is a press release from BMP (Breach Marine Protection),
now defunct. I burst into
tears of joy when I read it. Thanks to everyone who did their small part in making this
wonderful event happen, especially to those Yorkshire Brits at Breach who fought the
lawsuit in the US Appeals Court. Way to go!

US Appeals Court Overturns Makah Whaling Ruling

A United States federal appeals
court overturned the ruling that allowed Washington State’s Makah Indians to
re-start killing whales. The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in favour of the
Yorkshire-based BMP
and other plaintiffs, holding that the NMFS (National Marine Fisheries Service)
violated environmental laws in its rush to grant the Makah
the ability to kill whales. In 1999, the Makah killed a female
baby Gray whale under this US government authorisation.

Can the Federal Defendants now be trusted to take the clear-eyed
hard look at the whaling proposal’s consequences required by law, or will a new
Environmental Assessment (EA) be a classic Wonderland case of first-the-verdict,
then-the-trial?” the Court asked.

This is a major victory for the whales! said David Smith,
BMP ’s
Campaigns Director. The ruling is justification for four years of
work and many thousands of pounds spent. It has been a long, hard road through the US
court system, but justice has finally been done.

Initially, the maiming and slaughter of thirty four Eastern Pacific Gray whales was at
stake. But when a consensus of Commissioners at the
40 country strong International Whaling Commission meeting
(including the UK) in 1977 allowed the United States to claim
they had IWC (International Whaling Commission)
authorisation to kill Gray whales, this set a new precedent for whaling world-wide.

Anyone indigenous to an area that had a history of whaling could
now claim the same ‘rights’ as the Makah. Smith said in 1997. It’s called ‘cultural’ whaling,
the name for a loophole that nations looking to kill whales can drive a coach and horses
through. Here in Yorkshire they whaled from Hull and Whitby; I’m indigenous to this
area, shall I now claim a ‘cultural right’ to slaughter whales in the North
Sea?

The global implication of Makah whaling that was one of the motivations which took
Breach Marine Protection 9.66 megameters(6,000 miles)
miles to courts in Washington State and San Francisco. Another was
that none of the big, household name ‘anti-whaling’ groups were prepared to
take up the issue in any meaningful way said a BMP
spokesperson
today. A lot of groups made a big thing of this issue in their
newsletters but that’s where it stopped. The likes of WWF (World Wildlife Fund),
Greenpeace and
others saw this as a political hot potato that would burn the fingers of their friendship
with the almighty Americans.

Both these groups have already backed attempts by the US government to weaken US
Dolphin-Safe Tuna import laws.
Indeed, a report to the NMFS, unearthed under the US Freedom of Information procedure
whilst preparing the Appeal, alleges that Greenpeace US actually sent a letter of support
to the Makah.

Roedy’s note: Greenpeace oppose commercial whaling
but are willing to live with subsistence whaling. Greenpeace erroneously
classifies the Makah hunt as subsistence even though the Makah have survived happily for
many decades without whale meat. They also ignore the foot in the door effect. Commercial
whalers in Japan and Norway encourage the Makah because it makes it easier to make a case
for resuming commercial whaling.

Last year, Breach Marine Protection was banned from both IWC
meeting and the UK Whale Forum for a peaceful protest it undertook in support of Gray
whales at the IWC headquarters in Cambridge. Three requests were made by
BMP, the
IWC
was asked to:

place the Makah whaling issue on its agenda at Grenada (IWC
meeting) in isolation.

the Commissioners take a clear, public, open and pressure free vote purely on the
USA Makah whaling proposal.

now that Gray whales have been killed by the Makah before the
IWC
meeting, the IWC holds the USA Government fully responsible for
undermining the IWC — an international Convention — and the
international community and uses any redress open to the Commissioners under to it
International Law or by applying IWC
sanctions against the USA.

These very reasonable requests sought a democratic vote (something that should have
happened in 1997) of IWC
Commissioners on one of the most controversial issues the IWC
has
ever considered. But instead of democracy, a behind-closed-doors meeting of
IWC
Commissioners acted as accusers, judge and jury, allowing BMP
no
representation and banned it from IWC
meetings. Later, the UK Commissioner wrote to BMP
also banning
it from UK Whale Forum meetings for the same peaceful protest.

The United States Court proves that the US acted illegally by
allowing the Makah to kill whales. Breach Marine Protection acted to uphold the law by
demonstrating at the IWC headquarters, we will now be seeking reparation from both
the IWC and
the British government for defamation brought on by their bans.BMP said
today.

Note: the next IWC meeting opens in Adelaide, Australia on the 3rd. July.